COMES NOW the Plaintiff, by and through his undersigned counsel, and respectfully moves the Court to alter or amend the judgment previously rendered in this cause, and in support thereof says as follows:

Relevant Procedural History

1. On May 12, 2015, Plaintiff filed his Complaint in this cause seeking damages stemming from an assault and battery committed on his person by Defendant on or about February 9, 2015

2. On July 2, 2015, Defendant filed his answer

3. On February 21, 2017, a bench trial occurred at which Defendant failed to attend in-person or through counsel

The only testimony presented at trial was Plaintiff’s, which was uncontroverted by other admissible evidence

4. On February 23, 2017, the Court rendered a final judgment in favor of Defendant

Discussion

5. Plaintiff contends that pursuant to Rule 55, Ala.R.Civ.P., because Defendant failed to appear at trial in-person or through counsel, he was entitled to a default judgment against Defendant on the assault and battery claim

See Seventh Wonder v. Southbound Records, Inc.,

364 So.2d 1173 (Ala. 1978)

(A party who fails to appear on the day the case is set for trial is in default);

and

Cassioppi v. Damico,

536 So.2d 938 (Ala. 1988)

(A judgment entered after one party fails to appear at trial is treated as a default judgment)

6. Plaintiff further contends that because his trial testimony was uncontroverted by other

1
_________________________________________________
admissible evidence, he was entitled to an award of damages stemming from the assault and battery

7. Plaintiff contends the Court erred in not granting him a judgment, and in not awarding appropriate damages, on the assault and battery claim

WHEREFORE Plaintiff requests that the Court alter or amend the judgment previously entered in this cause, and grant him a default judgment against Defendant, and award him damages in the sum of $30,000.00, on the assault and battery claim, for the reasons set forth herein

November 18, 1988
——————————————————————https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1932665/cassioppi-v-damico/
——————————————————————
(A judgment entered after one party fails to appear at trial is treated as a default judgment)
——————————————————————https://casetext.com/case/cassioppi-v-damico
_________________________________________________
Henry D. “Butch” Binford, Houston County Circuit Court, 20th Judicial Circuit Judge, Dothan, Alabama (since February 12 2008) Huntingdon College (@HuntingdonColl) University of Alabama School of Law (@UALawSchool) former Veteran Prosecutor, in the Assault and Battery Civil case: Plaintiff v. Brian Ralph Beasley, Defendant (of Daleville, Dale County, Alabama) WHO FAILED TO APPEAR on the DAY the CASE (38-CV-2015-900261.00) WAS SET FOR TRIAL (February 21 2017) on February 23, 2017, espoused a NEW LEGAL THEORY when he ENTERED JUDGMENT for the DEFENDANT CONTRARY to Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure (ARCP) VII. JUDGMENT Rule 55: The rule eliminates the requirement of notice prior to entry of JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT when the DEFAULT arises from FAILURE TO APPEAR on the day the case is set for trial
——————————————————————http://wp.me/p5tuFO-1rB
_________________________________________________